tv Full Measure With Sharyl Attkisson CBS August 28, 2016 10:00am-10:31am CDT
sharyl: welcome to ?full measure.? i'm sharyl attkisson. today we begin with a question of human testing and the dilemma posed by the need to do research for the greater good and the right of human test subjects to know exactly what they're signing up for. our incredible story begins in 2004 with a federal study of 1300 extremely premature infants.
-- they had no idea they agreed to a risky experiment that could injure or kill their babies. >> little dreshan cook came into the world at one pound, eleven ounces, fighting for his life. his mother sharrissa was barely six months pregnant when he was born. >> i remember the night that i went into labor, i was a hysterical wreck. i was afraid, i was scared, i was in shock. sharyl: how big was he, do you remember? sharrissa: he would fit in your hand. sharyl: shortly after his birth at the university of alabama a birmingham, sharrissa agreed to enroll dreshan in a study called "support.? she says the hospital gave the impression she was simply signing up to get "support" in caring for a preemie. your thought was, when you signed the papers, that what was going to happen? sharrissa: that my son would be given the best care possible and that even with his prematurity being as extreme as it was, that it would be okay because i had all of this help. sharyl: she had no clue, she says, that the support study was actually a national experiment
premature infants. bernita lewis also agreed to enroll her baby, christian, in the support study at the same hospital. bernita: christian was born at 27 weeks. sharyl: how much did he weigh? bernita: he was 1 lb 9oz. he was very tiny. sharyl: she says a hospital worker told her the study was just to collect data. bernita: she asked would i be interested in christian being in a study. they wanted to use his medical records to help babies in the future. could use any records they wanted to use. sharyl: did she tell you there was a possible risk of death? bernita: no, there were no risks discussed. sharyl: support stands for "surfactant positive airway pressure and pulse oximetry randomized trial.? funded with $20.8 million tax dollars, it was a collaboration among the national institutes of health and two dozen research bodies including duke and yale universities and medical schools. researchers had good intentions. they already knew that without enough oxygen, preemies could
go blind. the support study was searching for the sweet spot. >> the question is, what level of oxygen would be optimum in order to save as many babies as possible without having the survivors become blind. sharyl: to find out, the infants were randomly assigned as with the flip of a coin to either a low oxygen group or a high oxygen group. the study reached a tragic conclusion. the babies in the high oxygen group were more likely to go blind. those unlucky enough to have been put in the low oxygen group were more likely to die. when the findings became known, similar research around the world was halted midstream. bioethicist dr. john lantos defended the support study as an expert witness against families who unsuccessfully sued for damages, including bernita and sharrissa. >> this was a study that was well designed, conducted to the
completely adequate consent that was conducted without harming any babies and led to an important finding that's gonna save lots of lives. sharyl: on nearly every point dr. michael carome disagrees. he's an internationally recognized expert on research ethics at the watchdog group public citizen. what's wrong with what they did in the studyin carome: the parents of these babies weren't told the exact purpose of the research, the nature of the research in terms of how experimental it was, and the risks of the research. sharyl: adding to the controversy researchers didn't , tell parents a remarkable fact, they had altered the infants' oxygen monitors to give false readings so the hospital wouldn't adjust them outside of their assigned low or high oxygen range. babies in the study were put on
readings? carome: that is correct. sharyl: in terms of things that have happened in the past, how bad is this? carome: i think this is extremely serious and about as bad as it gets. lantos: it seems to me that there's a lot of second guessing arm chair quarterbacking and playing gotcha here. sharyl: the debate would be purely academic if it weren't for an extraordinary turn of events. after questions were raised, the government agency that polices study ethics sided with critics and issued a searing , indictment oth government-led study. in a letter in 2013, the office for human research protections told researchers they violated federal regulations "for informed consent" for their "failure to describe the reasonably foreseeable risks of blindness, neurological damage and death.? dr. carome was once a senior leader at the office for human research protections. the ethics office was in essence saying these consent forms were unethical? carome: absolutely.
consent" arose from an american tragedy, the u.s. government's syphilis experiment on black men in tuskegee, alabama in 1932. for 40 years, the men were neither told they were in a study, nor treated for their syphilis. an outcry in 1972 led to new rules. researchers are now required to disclose risks to test subjects and get their voluntary informed consent. and studies like support must be approved by ethics experts where the research is conducted. these were prestigious institutions and the federal government. how does something like this slip past everybody? carome: that is a great concern of ours. we looked at the consent forms from 22 institutions and they all failed in their duty to protect human subjects in this study. lantos: most of the criticism is not coming from parents but from regulators who, in my opinion,
sharyl: when the support parents learned about the true risks, the surviving study children were six years old. what thoughts did you have? sharrissa: it was really emotional. a lot of crying, a lot of disbelief, a lot of heartache, and then it was anger. i'm his mom, you know i'm supposed to protect him, but it was almost like i threw him out to the wolves, you know. bernita: i was angry. and i couldn't believe that some people who vowed who took oaths to protect people would actually do this. that was mind-boggling. sharyl: if you had been told the risks involved and what they were really going to do would you have signed him up? bernita: absolutely not. no. sharyl: yet there were no , apologies. instead, the support researchers
they said the babies were actually better off for having been in the study. lantos: the risks of not being in that study were comparable to the risks of being in that study and perhaps even higher. sharyl: dr. carome argues that's simply wrong. carome: there's no doubt that some babies, because they were in the study, died as a result. sharyl: amid the criticism, the support researchers and national institutes of health dug in. they launched a public campaig of opinion letters and meetings to attack the office for human research protections and pressured it to suspend enforcement action. >> the sensational claims of calling people unethical, i think, really detract from the serious discussion that needs to occur. carome: the research community, many in the bioethics community and nih have rallied together to defend this unethical research, and that so that's part of the problem. sharyl: today, dreshan and christian are both nine and doing well considering their challenges.
health struggles from respiratory problems to brain disorders. their moms are left asking if the support study factors in. bernita: we don't know if it would have happened anyway, or if it was caused by this. and it's just a game of just wondering. sharissa: he was born premature, at 25 weeks. so, we could expect some things, but to know that some others could have been prevented, you know, that makes me angry. and so to the doctors or to the researchers, best thing i can say is shame on you. sharyl: more than 80 years after the tuskegee experiments, the support study has reopened painful wounds and is raising questions as to whether the protections for human test subjects are fundamentally flawed. those who've conducted this study and the federal government at large, have basically said they don't think they did
sharrissa: i don't see how anyone can say nothing was wrong with playing russian roulette with babies. babies who had no say so, no choice, no anything, just trying to survive. sharyl: numerous support researchers, the national institutes of health, or nih and , the university of birmingham at alabama declined our interview requests. after the study revealed more deaths among babies on low oxygen, the american academy of pediatrics issued new recommenti on the upper end of the oxygen curve. in other words, doctors should not do what the support researchers did to half of the babies. ahead on full measure, you've seen the u.s. southern border from above ground but , have you seen what lies beneath?
whatcha' doin? just checking my free credit score at credit karma. what the??? you're welcome. i just helped you dodge a bullet. but i was just checking my... shhh... don't you know that checking your credit score lowers it! just be cool. actually, checking your credit score with credit karma doesn't affect it at all. are you sure? positive. so i guess i can just check my credit score then? oooh "check out credit karma today. credit karma. give yourself some credit."
sharyl: on our trip to the southern border, we saw how or cut through the border fence or simply find spots where there is no fence at all. but you might be surprised to know how extensively mexico's smugglers use another tactic to move people and drugs into the u.s., underground tunnels. in march, a tunnel the length of four football fields was discovered running from a restaurant in mexico to a house in southern california. it's that underground network we invested -- investigate this
"tunnel vision. it's nicknamed the "james bond tunnel" - the first known drug tunnel unearthed in the u.s. back in 1990. federal agents who found it said it was like something out of a bond movie. at 270-feet long, it was dug near the official border crossing in the town of douglas, arizona. part of a drug trafficking network run by to mexican drug kingpin el chapo guzman. in just seven months, the feds say guzman used this 5-foot tall underground passageway to help smuggle 60,000 pounds of cocaine into the u.s. on the mexican side, there was a hidden switch inside a smuggler's luxury home used to lift a pool table and concrete slab to open the passageway. border patrol agent sergio martinez. martinez: the first tunnel was discovered in 1990 in douglas, arizona. and since then, they have encountered 183 tunnels within the tucson sector and the southern border. and most recently in nogales, arizona, they have actually created a team.
team in nogales where their daily duties are to go find tunnels. sharyl: border patrol agents use remote controlled robots to investigate the tunnels. the majority of them, at least 100, have turned up in the town of nogales, arizona. some just steps from the border crossing teeming with federal agents. this tunnel on the border town of naco is one of the longest, at more than 900 feet and one of the most recent discoveries. just a few hundred yards from the mexican border. that's it, the fence over there. and you can see right here in what looks like a shed next to a house, that's where the drug tunnel is. martinez: so apparently they were coming in through the shed, parking, opening the door, loading up the vehicle, and then pulling the stuff out of the tunnel. sharyl: and tell us how it was discovered? martinez: it was discovered by human intelligence. they pulled a vehicle over, and the guy had over 4,000 pounds of
up, and they came to the house with a warrant and arrested them all the individuals in the , house. and we come in here. here is the actual tunnel. so they had a lift gate. they were bringing the narcotraffics and all the stuff they had, all the narcotics. they were bringing it above, they had a lift since they were so heavy. they were just bringing it up, straight up. sharyl: how long was an operation like this going on for them to be able to dig the tunnel and move the drugs? martinez: that is unknown, but we believe they probably had it for quite a while. as you can see, it's a very sophisticated tunnel. with those poles under, there's lights, they were using oxygen to go across the border. sharyl: cochise county sheriff mark dannels says the illegal enterprise operated for months in the middle of a residential neighborhood. mark dannels: they had a guard
was armed when they took him down. but it's a vip tunnel, it's very sophisticated down there. sharyl: what do you mean vip tunnel? dannels: very important tunnel. the normal person coming across the border to find that better way of life wasn't coming through here. this was your high-quality drugs coming through here heroin, methamphetamine. and you hate to think, but i think there's a rally touch to it, whoever could pay a fee, and possibly terrorists coming through here, which scares the heck out of me and should scare everybody when it comes to this tunnel. the opening of this tunnel was only controlled on the mexico side. the folks guarding the tunnel on this side had no control of opening or closing it. sharyl: you mean it was mechanically shut, sealed, and open? >> from mexico, yes. the effort and the work shows you how desperate they were. sharyl: this is literally digging underwear border patrol maybe walking above ground every day. >> we promote community policing.
or did it. >> we had agents. we have become more able. it has decreased the use of them. sharyl: last year, el chapo guzman. he escapes through, what else, and el mile long. prison surveillance shows and taking a quick exit. the tunnel was complete with lights, ventilation, and a motorcycle on rails likely used to carry out dirt. he was recaptured in january. u.s. officials have noted a u.s. officials have noted a similarity between the tunnel guzman used to escape and that very first one discovered in douglas, arizona back in 1990. they may want to check the floor
sharyl: many have criticized the world muslim community for not being more aggressive in identifying and stopping violently radical elements within their own religion. but one muslim country has done exactly that. morocco is in an area of north africa called the maghreb, which has become a hotbed of islamic terrorist activity. there were 15 terrorist attack in the region in 2011. by 2014, the number leapt to over 1100. but of all those attacks, only one targeted morocco. so how has morocco achieved relative safety compared to its neighbors and what can we learn from it? scott thuman found two people with some answers. scott: morocco is one of the world's top tourist
desert scenes, ancient architecture, and at least one hollywood classic. "casablanca" was set during world war ii, when morocco in the french resistance against hitler. but since the attacks on paris and other terrorist assaults, the moroccans are front and center in another resistance: against islamic extremists. mohammed ben moroccan center for strategic studies. for him, the threat is as clear as the number of foreign fighters they track. >> when you have global view on this phenomenon, as we know we have in the region 1000, from algeria, 5,200 foreign terrorist fighter from tunisia, and when we move to the north in europe we have 1,700 from france, 815 belgium, 415 from germany, 500 from uk, 120 from sweden, so we have a very clear idea all the
terrorists are coming from. scott: when it comes to fighting terror, some have argued that it's not the u.s., it's not the u.k., but that it is morocco that perhaps has the right formula. the formula for success in fighting terror, is that true? benhammu: i think that morocco since the terror attack on casablanca on may 2003 have de experience. scott: the 2003 casablanca attacks were a wake-up call. suicide bombers killed 33 people. tens of thousands responded with banners saying no to terrorism. within the year, 2had been arrested. >> we know more about these terrorist groups the networking, how they greet and look for the
after this bombing the moroccan securities services tried to make a new concept of internal security. the second pillar was to manage the religious managing the mosque, that imam role and the mission of the imam must be important that they do now just use the mosque for giving political speech or violent speech. scott: why is morocco getting it right? general ward: the issue of cultural understanding, i think is something we could certainly take a lesson from. scott retired general kip ward : was the first commander of africom in charge of all us forces , operating in africa. general ward: we certainly spent time with that in africom,
a better job of understanding the cultural and societal implications for our actions where we are in fact doing our activities, and that's something that morocco pays attention to. scott: what is it when it comes to fighting terror that you think has allowed morocco to not only prevent more attacks in its own territory but also for -- swart -- th elsewhere? general ward: i think that's certainly a big key, their intelligence. having eyes and ears, having an understanding of what's going on in neighborhoods, putting the picture together, to help better understand what's going on, and i think part of morocco's success is their network of knowledge that they have put together to understand what's going on inside of their country scott doctor benhammou tells me : the key to morocco's success is they make human intelligence, not technology, their first focus, and rely heavily on what
the back of my next to. >> it is a very clever exploitation of the lack of economic expectation. >> when he's talking about the lack of basic understanding, he is calling the american people stupid, and he is talking about the cadillac tax. sharyl: that is coming up and scott thuman takes us to the frontline line of a new cold war confrontation. [gunshots] scott: what you hearing is not any ordinary military exercise. we are in a remote section of woods in estonia, 75 miles from the russian border. with the deafening sound of detonating ied's. >> there is enough going on in the world right now that we need
an in depth look at the people and events that shape our community.this is iowa in focus.this week -- we dig deep into the campaigns being run by both major political parties.and meet the group trying to change democratic voter turnout -- from outside any specific campaign. welcome to iowa in focus -- we're giving context to what happens in the headlines and on the campaign trail.this week, we're just it a little bit differently. instead of running through what happened during the week -- we're going to take a much deeper look at the type of campaigning we see at all different levels. senator ted cruz took his first trip to iowa in april 2015 -- officially kicking off the presidential primary season.that was also about the time that both major political parties were starting their ground games to support their eventual nominees.less than three months from the november election -- both major party's